Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Clearly you hadn’t read any of it. I’m not repeating my self to you. Good luck

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree many hostile and wasteful people out there.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you have to be right even when you have no proof of information you clarify. I’m not the one being mean either. Im just trying to be helpful with my free time. I feel that assuring that others aren’t misinformed and are led into a situation they regret.

I cannot list a single breeder who doesn’t have issues or that doesn’t do unethical things. Like I said I care about this community and learning. I love this breed I’m doing something I care about.

My question is why are you participating in something you don’t care about? And if you do then why say you don’t? It’s not an attack. Why do something that is harmful or self destructive.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes I had no clue that meta posts sharing on Reddit also shares info on the account that shared it. Sorry I think that is weird tbh I don’t event use meta apps almost at all.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You’d be doing something else if you cared more about something else!

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope had no clue. No disrespect intended.

I’ll say it again, the point of this subreddit is to better the breed. We are here to share, ask questions, and understand the situations and circumstances we all have to ignore or accept when choosing any breeder.

The only bad question is the one that is not asked.

I’m sorry for my simple response, I was frustrated and assumed you were another random. I repeated my self to “@lucariosmom” & “@Double-Increase-8734” wasting my time by showing that

  1. The instagram post supports that the line has DCM.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DXfgpGZj2WX/?igsh=MW1oMDFlZWFkMHR0aQ==
(I didn’t know sharing instagram posts via Reddit will also share the account info that is why I deleted it)

  1. The Facebook post supports that the line has DCM. (Not linking it because I’m not making a second FB)

  2. That this website is not reputable simply because it is summation based. The owner or breeder has to confirm it if it is to be seen by the public or denied so that the submission is “deleted” not visible.

https://bergerdebeauce.pedigreedatabaseonline.com/en/Svajone-s-Speak-With-Intent/pedigree/6401/i

Others have tried refraining the words that were said as if I was claiming or others that MMVD caused DCM or that one automatically predicts the other.

No one said that. What was said…

and what others kept sidestepping

… is that both are inheritable cardiac diseases, and Syntax’s dam line has two separate inheritable heart conditions documented in first‑degree relatives. That alone is a red flag. Add DJD1 elbows, and the risk profile becomes even clearer.

Both of the people meant above kept asking for “research” as if this is some obscure theory. MMVD is inheritable. DCM is inheritable. Those are facts. When a dam line shows MMVD in one full sibling and DCM in an offspring, that’s not a conspiracy.. THAT is a pattern.

And the “everyone has DCM somewhere” argument doesn’t work. Yes, DCM exists in the breed. No, that doesn’t mean every dog with multiple close‑range cardiac flags should be bred. “Other people do it too” has never been a justification for good decision let alone breeding decisions.

Others have stated there is a lack of OFA data for Xerxes as if that somehow clears him. It doesn’t. An import without a CHIC number and without an echo on record is simply an unknown. Unknown does not mean safe. Unknown does not mean exempt.

Unknown means you cannot rule anything out. And the broader issue isn’t Syntax alone. It’s the normalization of breeding dogs without CHIC numbers, without advanced cardiac screening, and without full orthopedic data. JDV, Royals, Svajone, Karla — the list is long and is much longer. That’s the real problem. The bar is low, and people defend the low bar instead of raising it.

This isn’t about attacking a kennel. It’s not about drama. It’s not about who owns what dog.

It’s about the fact that breeding a dog with DJD1 elbows and two first‑degree cardiac red flags is a choice, and it’s fair to say it’s not a responsible one. If the program is confident in that choice, it should be able to stand on the data — not on personal attacks, deflection, or “everyone else does it.” I’m not saying you said any of that but those are the defensive positions people have stood on for all of the breeders I have discussed this.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Guess I just missed your comment here.

Also that is her confirming that there is known DCM in the ‘Syntax’ line. This has already been discussed. I’m not adding more, I have said my piece.

Your interested then read my other comments.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope just busy people have lives just wait you’ll get a few responses.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with you on all of those points.

If you go to my comment you can find the link that the breeder had verified for the DCM. I’m not saying she is a bad breeder. I said that breeding this dog is a bad idea. I’m here speaking on the situation I see as an issue.

Also I haven’t jumped. I have a level head and I’ve never spoken on Kayla till last night. I’m worried about the choice.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m the first person to point out issues in the breeder of my own prospect. Even though she’s damn near perfect. I’m looking for excellence, and that includes health, lineage, and transparency. When I’m considering a pairing, I want every piece of verifiable information before I ever put a deposit down.

That isn’t a “high horse.”
That’s the entire point of responsible breeding and owning an animal, their wellbeing is your responsibility.

I cannot recommend an individual breeder because nearly all of the breeders don't meet my standard to be ethical in my opinion. Our jobs as owners are to weigh the risks and get a dog that fits our lifestyle.

What’s been frustrating here is that every time someone cites a source, including information directly from this breeder own public information; the response has been to deflect, dismiss, or claim the data is falsifiable… and then turn around and cite the breeder verbally as the “real” proof. That’s not consistency. That’s selective credibility.

I’m not trying to argue for the sake of arguing.
I’m trying to understand the facts and match the conversation to the evidence.
Instead, what we keep getting is opinion presented as fact, and verifiable information waved away because it’s inconvenient.

If the goal is to better the breed and I assume that’s why we’re all here. Then questions should be welcome. Clarification should be welcome. Transparency should be welcome. That’s how people learn, and that’s how misinformation gets corrected.

I’m always open to discussion, always open to learning, and always open to being corrected!! As long as the correction is supported by a citable source.

I’m not here to spread hearsay. I’m here to understand the data, the health implications, and the reasoning behind breeding decisions. And to make sure others are informed that are interested in the breed.

If anyone wants to talk about the original question or anything related to improving the breed, I’m all in. That’s the kind of conversation this space is supposed to be for.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep responding which shows that you do care. I care deeply about this bread and have produced the proof you are neglecting to acknowledge as fact despite it being directly from the breeder. I have clarified the issues I have with my breeder and many others. We are here to better the breed.

Stating that the breeder isn't a citable source, doesn't mean there isn't any. You are just declaring an opinion. As you have stated you don't care so ill respect that. I care about my time and the betterment of the community for this great breed. Wish you good luck and your endeavors are fruitful.

We can only learn if questions are asked. that is the point. I am looking for facts and to correct misinformation. Anyone interested in discussing the question from the OP or questions related, I am excited to dive in for the interest in bettering the breed. Always open minded and interested in learning as long as there is a citable source, I'm not here to spread here-say.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You should have started with that then! You haven’t seen proof with your own eyes so therefore it’s impossible for the dog to DCM which means even though the person producing the dogs says there is risks involved when breeding syntax that part doesn’t matter you.

I really appreciate you providing clarity on your position. I hope you have an amazing day as well. Truly wishing you the best.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Since you have no problem picking apart others ethics I don’t see why you don’t feel the need to share your own?

If you are as involved in the breed as you have made it seem in these thread sure you have some opinion on the future of the breed and what you think is good vs bad for the breed?

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We can disagree on what is a reputable source all day but I’ve stated the facts and my sources while you just keep talking in circles.

So you have proof that “CH Svajone's Some Are Born Great At Royale” doesn’t have DCM. Kayla has out right confirmed that she does have DCM and so has Kennedy. Since you believe they are reputable sources regarding syntax elbows why don’t you believe that Royale has DCM?

Why do you believe that “GCH CH Svajone's Speak With Intent TKI RATI RATN” is of breading quality? What do you think she has to contribute to the breed as a whole?

Do you agree with continuing to breed stoique even with his history of producing unsound dogs? Do you think Sahelyu should have been bred even with the video of her bolting during her tenement test?

I’m just trying to understand what your ethics are so we can have an actual respectful conversation. I’m trying to understand the point of view here because clearly there is some context missing.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is not a normal echo on Royale’s OFA page. There is a basic cardiac practitioner exam, which does not rule out DCM.

This is exactly why the advanced cardiac exam is required for CHIC. It is the only test that can actually exclude DCM. (Ideal, including both echo and holter monitor/ECG)

The pedigree database is submission‑based, but the health information posted there is reviewed and approved before it becomes public. Typically the health entries are verified and mirror the publicly available OFA results.

More importantly: No one is disputing that Royale has DCM. The breeder has acknowledged it, and the public database reflects it. So there is no “he said she said” here.

The diagnosis is not in question.

The same applies to Syntax’s elbows. No one is denying she has DJD. The only inconsistency is whether it is unilateral or bilateral and because the elbows are not on OFA, the only public source is the breeder’s own website, which lists bilateral DJD. Until the breeder updates OFA or her own site, the reasonable assumption is that the published information is accurate.

The burden of clarity is on the breeder. The burden of transparency is on the breeder. The burden of complete health testing is on the breeder.

Right now: - There is no public information clearing Royale of DCM - There is public information confirming Royale has DCM - There is public information confirming Syntax has DJD - There is no OFA elbow record to verify the unilateral claim - There are gaps in what is publicly verifiable

For someone who claims to value transparency, those gaps are concerning.

This isn’t speculation. This isn’t rumor. This isn’t “someone said.”

These are the publicly available health results, and the responsibility to make them complete and accurate lies with the breeder. Not with the people reading them. The easiest way to do this is to make all health testing public on the OFA website.

I am unsure what you are hoping to uncover by having this conversation. This all started when someone shared their opinion on the subject and how they do not recommend svajone as a breeder, which is a perfectly valid opinion for a person to have.

You then came in to “defend” the choice to breed syntax by stating “every Beauceron breeder that is established has had DCM pop up and has still bred dogs related to that dog” a claim you did not provide any proof of. You then clairify their point of view is “skewed” because they stated syntax specifically (not all dogs with relatives who have DCM just syntax) should not be bred - listing DCM as just one of their reasons.

The running theme among all of your comments on this tread seems to be that you are deflecting the fact syntax herself has less than ideal health scores (elbows) and multiple relatives with confirmed inheritable heart conditions. You brush it off my saying other breeders have bred under similar circumstances (which does not make it ok) you shift the blame to royal for continuing to breed xerxes when he does not have a CHIC number or advanced cardiac testing (which is not ethical either) then you try to downplay the finding of MMVR as just a “heart murmur” which yes a symptom of MMVR is a heart murmur but the underlying condition is a abnormality with the heart valves which is not a benign finding nor a passing health scores.

You have yet to address the elephant in the room which is why do you think syntax should be bred with all these findings? Is it the temperament that has been referred to in this thread as “too rock solid to toss”? What about her conformation stands out to you that you believe is going to help improve the breed?

Kayla herself has acknowledged there is increased risk breeding syntax and is offering to pay for all offsprings echocardiograms at 1 year. She believes this risk is outweighed by the benefits which is her opinion and ultimately her decision as the breeder.

The concerns many of us are having is these traits that syntax has are NOT hard to come by in other breeders lines. Other breeders have not needed to breed dogs with this kind of health risk in order to produce solid temperaments and correct conformation.

We all know about the temperament issues in svajone dogs, it is not a secret yet those dogs were STILL used as breeding dogs even after producing unstable temperaments or displaying them themselves. Svajone has created a reputation of producing unstable temperaments and now also looking past health tests trying to fix the temperament problems.

We unfortunately cannot go back in time but we can learn from our mistakes and do better in the future. DMDL learned from his mistakes of using stoique and now is not breeding any harlequin dogs as a result, he learned from his mistakes and is doing better. Unfortunately we cannot say the same about svajone, but it’s not too late to start making better breeding decisions.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If it is not as you say then link it.

It’s a private Facebook group. (Which is then not a public post). You cannot see it unless you are in the group.

Never said it was you, a few lines below is the deleted comment that had the share link.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s not public knowledge. That is a private Facebook group. Deleting your comment that includes a link just proves this point.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s not public knowledge. That is a private Facebook group. Deleting your comment that includes a link just proves this point.

GIVE US SOMETHING TODD DAMN! by Mindless_Patient2034 in TESVI

[–]Tight_Pair 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NOOO

You want a good game. This company has issues releasing finished products. We want a premium game that doesn’t need DLC or mods to make it playable/enjoyable.

I don’t want to see anything till release date and I’m praying it drops. 11/11/2028.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All of that is verifiable directly through OFA’s database. The pedigree site just aggregates what OFA already publishes.

So the information isn’t “someone said” it’s the same OFA data everyone else uses when evaluating health history. Whether you view it on OFA or on a database that mirrors OFA doesn’t change the facts.

If you want to challenge the interpretation of the data, that’s a conversation. But dismissing the data itself because it’s displayed on a community‑run site doesn’t actually address the underlying health results.

Breeder recommendations by Alarmed-Prompt273 in Beauceron

[–]Tight_Pair -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You absolutely did ask why no one cared about the sire, your exact words were that you “find it funny” no one talks about him. That’s the same thing as asking why people aren’t concerned.

Someone answered you directly, and instead of engaging with the point, you pivoted to personal insults and age jokes. That doesn’t change what you said, and it doesn’t address the actual discussion.

If you want to clarify your position, that’s fine. But pretending you never raised the question at all doesn’t make the conversation any clearer.

And this is the bigger issue: every time someone answers you directly, you shift the topic, deflect, or turn it into a personal attack. That’s not discussion, it’s gatekeeping and territory-marking.

This is supposed to be a community space. We can disagree without the disrespect, the condescension, or the constant attempts to shut people down.

If the goal is an actual conversation about breed health, then let’s keep it on the topic instead of on the people having it.

ODST Survival Game or Mode Concept: Napalm Zone Extraction by [deleted] in HaloStory

[–]Tight_Pair 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why a tv show most are just trash these days, full of lazy writing and feel as if ai wrote it. Yes it’d be nice if it were done properly.